Quote:what if for every bill that comes up for debate you need to change your delegate?
Then you change your delegate. Or don;t bother. It is your choice. Though it seems unlikely as there are only two possible ways to vote on each bill (excluding abstention), and a lot of members to cast their vote one way or the other, so there is going to be quite a few who vote your way into the forseeable future. In any case, even it is does not turn out to be perfect, it is a hell of a lot better than the current system, which only lets you change your mind once every few years and only gives you two effective choices anyway.
Quote:the chances of an MP agreeing with someone all the time is limited
Actually I think it is quite high. Remember, the house will not be dominated by two parties, but by a variety of members with different platforms. If you want more choice, increase the number of members. Also, there is usually only about one bill per year that the majority take a real interest in.
Quote:and if enough people felt the same then an MP could be in and out and in and out every few weeks
I have included provisions for this in the article. I should have it online soon. A member on the verge of ejection is hardly going to be appointed to a ministerial position.
Quote:It isnt so much that the idea is daft, but rather that it is absolutely impractical and requires a far, far higher level of involvement from an already apathetic electorate.
It does not require it at all. In fact it requires less involvement than the current system. You are confusing the fact that it permits more involvement with requiring this involvement. Compare this with our current system, where you are stuck with the same candidate for many years, and if you don't like how he votes, there is nothing you can do about it. Even worse, the majority of the population do not even support their representative. They disagree with him before he even gets into parliament. To make it even worse, when your 3 or 4 year sentence is up, guess how much say you have then? None, because the same fool gets back in again.
Also, permitting more involvement will actually make the community less apathetic.
Quote:Failing that it becomes nothing more than a minority groups plaything and govt is rendered ineffective.
How so? It is still only one vote each. No minority can force the majority to vote their way, because ultimately it comes down to how the people vote, not how the politicians vote. The people will withdraw their support from mainstream candidates in droves if they start supporting the wrong things. There is a level of accountability there that does not exist in our current system. That is the benefit of the system.
Quote:The notion of a sceond preference having equal weight to a first is inequitable and incorrect.
No it isn't. It is the principle of one person, one vote.
Quote:Thats why if we must have 'run-off' then dont use this system. NOBODY thinks of preferential voting as run-offs.
That is because they misunderstand the system. But in reality, that is what it is.